So far in the early months of the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump as attacked his ex UN ambassador, attacked De Santis who he supported for governor, and now unloaded on his ex press secretary.
McEnany stood in the White House press room day after day and took bullets for Trump, and he can't even be bothered to spell check his unwarranted attacks on her.
I see people like Trump and others who constantly blame others for everything that they don't like, yet strangely no one seems to find that strange.
23 comments:
Your first two paragraphs I think I understand... that Trump behaves in a way that suggests a graceless narcissism. Which is fine, as far as it goes.
But your last paragraph, I'm not clear on what you're trying to suggest.
I see people like Trump and others who constantly blame others for everything that they don't like, yet strangely no one seems to find that strange.
"Blame others for everything that they don't like..."
Well, that would depend on what one means by "they don't like," right?
I mean, I don't like rape, oppression, bigotry, causing harm to racial minorities, LGBTQ folks, women and other traditionally oppressed peoples. And I DO blame those who engage in those actions/policies (including myself when I used to be more oppressive towards LGBTQ folks and less than an ideal ally of black people). But that's only rational, right?
I'm guessing you are thinking that Trump (and others like him?) are blaming the press, the FBI, the "RINOs," the Democrats, the Justice Department and others for problems created by his OWN misdeeds... is that the point? That Trump doesn't like being held accountable for his own misdeeds and so he blames everyone but himself for what's happening to him?
Just trying to understand.
"Well, that would depend on what one means by "they don't like," right?"
Yes, it would. In this case, Instead of reverting to your laundry list of really bad things, how about if we simply looked at the context and realized that Trump is overrating to anyone who he sees as trying to stand in the way of his run for POTUS. He's taking disagreement over political issues as a personal attack and going overboard. He's not the only one who blames everything on political opponents, just the one who's in the news right now.
Do you not realize how unhinged people sound when they never take responsibility for their own actions? When it's always someone else's fault? If only the CDEFG's would do exactly what I want them to do, or it's always the CDEFG's who won't...
It sounds unhinged and paranoid when Trump does it, just like it does when anyone else does it.
"That Trump doesn't like being held accountable for his own misdeeds and so he blames everyone but himself for what's happening to him?"
I'm not limiting this trait only to trump, but to anyone who is unable to understand how they've contributed to something negative.
Do you not realize how unhinged people sound when they never take responsibility for their own actions?
I truly do. Do you?
When it's always someone else's fault?
Yes, that's very sad when people won't own up to their own mistakes and, instead, blame it on "Them." Whoever "Them" might be. For instance, failing to recognize that Trump is far and away the most prominent narcissist amongst our current leaders and instead, trying to insist that Trump's over-the-top malignant narcissism and corruption is just like many other politicians, instead of owning that the GOP has become a useful idiot to an obviously corrupt idiot. Instead of starting by pulling incredibly large log out of conservative eyes and trying to suggest that he's just another bad apple. That too, would be an example of not owning up to one's own sides' awful mistake.
For my part, I've been clear that IF it were shown to be likely that H Biden engaged in illegal activities, he should definitely be held accountable, and same for J Biden. But we don't see that from the modern GOP much. Instead, all we get are a bunch of excuses for behavior that they CLEARLY would not abide from a Democrat candidate/leader.
Or those who "contribute to something negative..." which would also include the modern GOP's attack on our actual history and demonizing and attempts at silencing of people simply trying to report history. Or those in the modern GOP who try to demonize and criminalize LGBTQ people or abortion and women making their own medical decisions.
OR the Democrats and the GOP failing to step up for refugees and immigrants who, FAR and away, are simply trying to be safe and find a better life.
It sounds unhinged and paranoid when Trump does it, just like it does when anyone else does it.
The difference is: When Trump falsely states that the "media" is an enemy of the state who hate the US and want to destroy us, it's clearly a false and STUPIDLY false claim meant to scare the useful idiots who are willing to participate in a stupid con. When we report that Trump's attacks on the media are dangerous and delusional, we're just stating what's clearly observable.
When Trump falsely claims that the election was stolen and he's the actual president, it's clearly a false and STUPIDLY and DANGEROUSLY false claim that must be repudiated. When we repudiate the dangerous false claim, we're just doing what should be done by all conservatives.
Pretending that Trump is acting in a manner similar to progressives or even reasonable, non-Trump conservatives is part of the problem. Trump is an outlier and not JUST an outlier, but an extreme and malignant outlier. Pretending otherwise just adds support to the con man and the racists who support him.
So all the experts are wrong and you're the one we should be listening to?
Narcissism, much?
Sometime after that, unless Congress raises or suspends the debt limit, the federal government will lack the cash to pay all its obligations. Those obligations are the result of laws previously enacted by Congress. As our colleagues Len Burman and Bill Gale wrote, “Raising the debt limit is not about new spending; it is about paying for previous choices policymakers legislated.”
The economic effects of such an unprecedented event would surely be negative. However, there is an enormous amount of uncertainty surrounding the damage the U.S. economy will incur if the U.S. government is unable to pay all its bills—it depends on how long the situation lasts, how it is managed, and the extent to which investors alter their views about the safety of U.S. Treasuries. An extended impasse is likely to cause significant damage to the U.S. economy. Even in a best-case scenario where the impasse is short-lived, the economy is likely to suffer sustained—and completely avoidable—damage.
https://www.brookings.edu/2023/04/24/how-worried-should-we-be-if-the-debt-ceiling-isnt-lifted/
The U.S. government could default on its debt in a matter of weeks if it doesn't raise the debt ceiling.
That would spell "economic calamity," Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned this weekend.
"Whether it's defaulting on interest payments that are due on the debt or payments due for Social Security recipients or to Medicare providers, we would simply not have enough cash to meet all of our obligations," she told ABC's This Week. "And it's widely agreed that financial and economic chaos would ensue."
https://www.npr.org/2023/05/08/1174703720/debt-ceiling-standoff-economic-calamity-yellen
https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2023/05/03/debt-ceiling-scenarios/
etc, etc, etc.
But rest assured, Craig has told us it's not a problem.
"When we report that Trump's attacks on the media are dangerous and delusional..."
...you're proving yourself dangerous and delusional. The leftist media is indeed a danger to this nation...an enemy of the people...because like you, they lie, distort and promote falsehoods of all kinds.
"When Trump falsely claims that the election was stolen..."
He's never "falsely claimed" such a thing. He factually stated what's clear to all honest Americans. It's liars like you who falsely claim he made false claims about being robbed of a second term.
Nobody is more racist than a progressive. You losers are obsessed with race. Trump isn't. Trump supporters aren't. Are there racists among his supporters? Possibly. They're not in any way a significant percentage because there's not that many actual racists in the nation who are not leftists.
The government won't default by not raising or eliminating the debt ceiling. They'll default by not redirecting the billions of dollars they intend to waste toward paying the debt. Your very own Rand Paul, the one great senator from Kentucky, provides an annual list of destinations for our tax dollars. Here's a partial list of a whopping $482,276,543,907 in wasteful spending from 2022:
2.1 mil to encourage Ethiopians to wear shoes
50 mil to boost the Tunisia travel sector during Covid-119
1.7 bil to maintain 77,000 empty federal buildings
168 mil to help illegals avoid deportation (this one is rich! Biden allows illegals to break our laws and then helps them avoid deportation when caught! And Trump is the con man!!)
Here's a couple of the smaller ones, because they're just so stupidly wasteful:
3 mil to watch hamsters fight on steroids
689K to study romance between parrots
519K for using mice to study racial aggression (just watch progressives for free!)
187K verifying that kids love their pets
and my favorite...
119K to research if Thanos could snap his fingers wearing the Infinity Gauntlet
But no, the "experts" say we must raise the debt ceiling, borrow and print more so we can waste that dough on crap like this! Lying lefties and their lying lefty "experts"!
"A recent POGO analysis, for instance, documented the malfeasance of TransDigm, a military parts supplier that the Department of Defense’s Inspector General caught overcharging the Pentagon by as much as 3,800% — yes, you read that figure right! — on routine items. ...
thanks to Pentagon regulations, those oversight officials are quite literally flying blind when it comes to cost control. The companies supplying the military take full advantage of that. The Pentagon Inspector General’s office has, in fact, uncovered more than 100 overcharges by TransDigm alone, to the tune of $20.8 million. A comprehensive audit of all spare-parts suppliers would undoubtedly find billions of wasted dollars."
https://quincyinst.org/2022/02/03/what-a-waste-778-billion-for-the-pentagon-and-still-counting/
1. It would be easier to take seriously your "concern" about "wasteful spending" if you'd said ANYTHING about the billions (trillions?) of dollars wasted, misspent and literally unaccounted for in the military budget.
2. Your concern about these other expenditures may or may not be justified (you've provided no source to give any context or even proof of veracity to your examples), but regardless, it's not as if we are opposed to reasonable cuts on these smaller expenses if it's actually wasteful.
I could no doubt point to tens or hundreds of billions of dollars of wasteful, unaccounted-for spending in the defense budget. Let's talk about the BIG expenditures first, then we could review your million dollar concerns about shoe programs. But you and the GOP won't go down that road, will you?
Dan
Dan,
The fact that you've been able to find one example of overspending in the Biden pentagon, is one example of where spending could and should be adjusted or cut. Your assumption that I blindly advocate for absolutely zero controls on military spending is simply your partisan blindness coming through. I have repeatedly, over the years, been quite clear that wasteful government spending in ALL areas of government should be eliminated. The fact that you ONLY focus on ONE agency of the executive branch (Biden) simply shows you partisan, anti military bias.
1. I'm sorry, I was under the impression that my reference to reducing ALL spending would lead you to the conclusion that the Biden DOD was part of ALL. I've consistently and in some detail, over the years, been quite clear about supporting appropriate spending cuts in the DOD.
2. Yet, you can't even acknowledge the reality that spending in your pet programs could possibly wasteful. You would gain a little credibility if your targets for spending cuts were not only in the DOD, and if your goal was to lower spending, not spend the money elsewhere.
Again, I've been clear that spending cuts across the board, includes the DOD. I have no problem with appropriate spending cuts in the DOD and have consistently and repeatedly said so over the years. I am not advocating NOT cutting spending for the DOD.
You would gain a tiny bit of credibility if you would actually look at any other department the way you look at the DOD. You treat the DOD budget as if it's a magic pot of gold to fund other things you like better.
The fact that you need to resort to this fantasy that I support every single dime spend by the DOD and would never support any cuts to the DOD budget tells me plenty. The fact that you won't look at any department beyond the DOD as a target for cuts, also communicates volumes. The fact that you act as if the DOD is not under the executive branch and thus firmly under the control of Biden continues to reinforce my belief that you have very little understanding of how the US federal government actually works.
Finally, your silence on the Biden administration choosing to spend trillions on proxy wars and to willingly abandon billions of functional military hardware to the Taliban reinforces my conclusions that your views on military spending are infused with your blind partisan support.
, I was under the impression that my reference to reducing ALL spending would lead you to the conclusion that the Biden DOD was part of ALL.
Sorry, I was responding primarily to Marshal's list of penny ante spending complaints.
1. I am opposed to - EVERYONE - is opposed to any and all truly "wasteful" spending. The question is, what is wasteful.
2. IF we have a study being funded, as Marshal references, that spends "3 mil to watch hamsters fight on steroids"... and that's all it is... JUST to watch hamsters fighting, that would be wasteful and silly-sounding. But what is the context? Is it actually studying steroids and looking for proper uses of it in humans? Then maybe not. But ANY truly wasteful spending should be cut. Of course. Because WE ARE NOT IRRATIONAL, that way.
3. But my point was I'm MUCH less concerned about $3 million in scientific research (I presume) about hamsters than I am about hundreds of billions of dollars in the Pentagon that we don't even KNOW how it's being used, fully. I assume you're aware of the lack of accountability in the DOD budget?
"By 2015, the amount reported missing by the Office of the Inspector General had increased to $6.5 trillion—and that was just for the army. "
https://www.city-journal.org/article/americas-missing-money
I get the whole notion of watching your pennies so you save your dollars, but when we're talking about the tens and hundreds of billions of wasteful or "lost" spending in the defense budget alone, well, it's just hard to take seriously these concerns about $1 million hamster studies.
You treat the DOD budget as if it's a magic pot of gold to fund other things you like better.
Well... when we're talking about HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of wasted dollars in the military budget, that would go a LONG way towards funding several of these millions and tens of millions dollar projects that have measurable positive results. Funding increases to programs to help people get educated and find employment results in TAX payers adding to the pot, rather than unemployed and unemployable people NOT adding to the pot. It's a long-term tax-SAVER.
I'm for wise spending that helps promote a healthy economy and society. And that takes actual investments.
Marshal complains about programs to assist immigrants and refugees, but FAR and away, what most immigrants want (according to the data) is to simply work and make money for themselves and their families. And when they do that, they pay taxes. They are a net positive to the economy and budget, long term.
I'm opposed to short term cuts that lead to long term spending MORE. As I've often cited: The research on prison spending to help inmates get training, get addiction services, get education... these may cost millions but they save and generate TENS of millions. Again, according to the data and study after study.
Let's not cut off our noses to spite our faces and let's look at the actual budget costs that can more rationally be trimmed.
As to nations around the world assisting Ukraine, if assisting a relative-innocent nation beat back an unjustified invasion by a Russia or a China, that, too, is long-term rational and wise and a cost-saving.
The fact that you need to resort to this fantasy that I support every single dime spend by the DOD and would never support any cuts to the DOD budget tells me plenty.
Um. I've never said that you support every single dime spent by the DOD. I'm noting the REALITY that the GOP always wants to increase, and never decrease military spending, including spending BEYOND what the DOD is even asking for. The reality is that we always hear vague complaints about various "hamster spending" type efforts, rarely with context, and always complaining about the tens or hundreds of thousands being spent on such efforts from conservative types but RARELY do we hear complaints about actual tens of billions (or more) that goes wasted in the DOD from conservative types.
Do you recognize that reality? Do you recognize the Marshal just did that with his vague list and that this is a common meme in conservative circles?
As to the awkward and costly exit from Afghanistan and the massive amount of money spent (wasted?) in Iraq and Afghanistan... WHO was it who warned against those invasions and against those efforts? WHO was it who said that there would be no perfect or good way to end our time in those invasions (begun by Bush amidst great progressive and moderate disapproval and continued by every president since, Democrat and GOP)?
Progressives fought against spending that money in those invasions as hard as we could and when we got there and found - lo and behold! - that there was no good way to exit... well, we literally told you so. Yes, Biden did a terrible job getting out of a no-win situation, but at least he got us out of the forever-war that your boys started.
"I'm noting the REALITY that the GOP always wants to increase, and never decrease military spending, including spending BEYOND what the DOD is even asking for."
I'm noting the reality that the very minute you used the phrase "the GOP always", your statement became false. Further, the assumption that because you have a perception about what "the GOP" does, does not automatically mean that your assumption describes me.
"The reality is that we always hear vague complaints about various "hamster spending" type efforts, rarely with context, and always complaining about the tens or hundreds of thousands being spent on such efforts from conservative types but RARELY do we hear complaints about actual tens of billions (or more) that goes wasted in the DOD from conservative types."
I'm not sure what this vague, nonspecific, broad generalization is supposed to prove. I've heard conservatives speak with great regularity on getting rid of waste, fraud, and abuse in the DOD, as well as in other departments.
"Do you recognize that reality?"
No. See above.
"Do you recognize the Marshal just did that with his vague list and that this is a common meme in conservative circles?"
No. I will note that you also deal in vagueness, and fail to provide details when you myopically only focus on the DOD.
"As to the awkward and costly exit from Afghanistan and the massive amount of money spent (wasted?) in Iraq and Afghanistan... WHO was it who warned against those invasions and against those efforts?"
Well Bush did have virtually unanimous bipartisan support when congress approved the invasions post 9/11. I personally heard warnings from all sides of the political spectrum. Of course none of this justifies Biden's rash decision to pull out of Afghanistan in a hurry and to choose to leave billions of dollars worth of functioning military equipment for the Taliban to use.
"WHO was it who said that there would be no perfect or good way to end our time in those invasions (begun by Bush amidst great progressive and moderate disapproval and continued by every president since, Democrat and GOP)?"
Impressive way to try to pretend that the only acceptable standard is perfection. The reality is that Biden chose to leave Afghanistan in such a way as to provide billions of dollars in functioning military equipment to the Taliban. He could have chosen to take the equipment, he could have chosen to destroy the equipment, but he didn't. He chose to be the QM to the Taliban. P-BO had 8 years to get out, and chose not to. Biden chose to stick with the timetable established by Trump, and to do so in a way that condemned thousands/millions of Afghan citizens to increased harm, and to provide the Taliban with billions in military equipment to help them oppress their citizens. But he's not responsible for his decisions.
"Progressives fought against spending that money in those invasions as hard as we could and when we got there and found - lo and behold! - that there was no good way to exit... well, we literally told you so. Yes, Biden did a terrible job getting out of a no-win situation, but at least he got us out of the forever-war that your boys started."
Blame the other guys first.
"Well... when we're talking about HUNDREDS of BILLIONS of wasted dollars in the military budget, that would go a LONG way towards funding several of these millions and tens of millions dollar projects that have measurable positive results. Funding increases to programs to help people get educated and find employment results in TAX payers adding to the pot, rather than unemployed and unemployable people NOT adding to the pot. It's a long-term tax-SAVER."
As if there aren't other departments that have hundreds of billions of dollar budgets that couldn't be used for the same things. As if the military isn't going to have to replace what Biden has given away for free, and to replace those gifts at a higher cost. By all means, let's just lower our ability to defend ourselves, so we can give more free stuff to people. I've got a better idea. All the folx you want to give a free education to, how about we simply conscript them into the military, give them training to acquire marketable skills, as well as GI benefits for education, housing, and medical care?
"I'm for wise spending that helps promote a healthy economy and society. And that takes actual investments."
Speaking of vague, general, blather.
"Marshal complains about programs to assist immigrants and refugees, but FAR and away, what most immigrants want (according to the data) is to simply work and make money for themselves and their families. And when they do that, they pay taxes. They are a net positive to the economy and budget, long term."
If you say so.
"I'm opposed to short term cuts that lead to long term spending MORE. As I've often cited: The research on prison spending to help inmates get training, get addiction services, get education... these may cost millions but they save and generate TENS of millions. Again, according to the data and study after study."
Yet in 8 years on Clinton, 8 years of PBo, and over 2 years of Biden, there has been no federal legislation proposed to do this. Strange that we have states like NY, CA, WA, OR, and the like which have been controlled by the DFL for decades and haven't adopted these miracle programs. But, it's all the GOP's fault.
"Let's not cut off our noses to spite our faces and let's look at the actual budget costs that can more rationally be trimmed."
By all means, let's do so. It's almost like a token 1% reduction in ALL discretionary spending would have been a tiny step towards doing just that. You surely can't be arguing that every federal department couldn't cut a measly 1% of wasteful spending, can you?
"As to nations around the world assisting Ukraine, if assisting a relative-innocent nation beat back an unjustified invasion by a Russia or a China, that, too, is long-term rational and wise and a cost-saving."
Really, giving away billions/trillions of military hardware to facilitate a proxy war is a good thing. If defending Ukraine from this invasion is such a noble enterprise, why are we not sending more billions of dollars worth of free gifts, as well as sending troops? Wouldn't a few US infantry/Armored divisions on the ground, and a couple of wings of fighters and bombers have significantly altered the current situation? How is prolonging the suffering of millions of Ukrainian people a "good" thing?
"Sorry, I was responding primarily to Marshal's list of penny ante spending complaints."
Perhaps you could have been more clear. Although, I would argue that Art's list of things that could be cut was intended as a place to START, not as an exhaustive list that would solve the problem. Or as an example of things outside the DOD that could easily be cut.
"By 2015, the amount reported missing by the Office of the Inspector General had increased to $6.5 trillion—and that was just for the army. "
Let's look at this out of context claim for just a second, on a fairly superficial level.
Since 1993 the executive branch (which controls all actual spending in the DOD) has featured 8 years of Clinton, 8 years of P-Bo, and 2+ years of Biden. So it's reasonable to conclude that those three bear a proportionate degree of responsibility for spending and oversight in the DOD. (Reality check, again. Congress appropriates the money, but the executive branch is where the specific spending decisions are made. For example. Congress might appropriate $1,000,000 for hammers in FY 2022. The DOD actually chooses which hammers to by, why they buy them from, and what the unit cost will be.)
So, even though the majority of the DOD spending over the last 30 years has been undertaken by DFL presidents, and the reality that congress doesn't control the specifics of procurement and spending, you continue to claim that it is all the fault of the GOP.
But please, don't let reality get in the way of your partisan, pacifist, ideological, convictions.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1985/02/05/now-the-600-toilet-seat/917c98b4-c2fc-40a5-808b-87ff4e5884c8/
1985 GOP legislator, GOP executive, were the ones who called out defense contractors for the $600 toilet seats. But the GOP "always" wants to spend and waste more.
Just a thought. If the DOD could eliminate significant waste, fraud, and abuse, they could use that money to pay our servicemen and servicewomen an appropriate salary. They could by our servicemen and women the absolute best PPE, and equipment. They could invest in technology that would place our servicemen and servicewomen at less risk.
Or, they could continue to shortchange our servicemen and servicewomen, and use the DOD savings on people who choose NOT to serve our country. That's a great idea.
Dan's whining is typical butt covering on his part. But the reality is that the "source" of my list is a sitting Senator who has access to the numbers listed. I took a sampling of his list for that year, and the source from which I took it might only have done the same. The point is as Craig suggested...that the list provides an example of how our money is being spent, with so much of it outside the Constitutional duties of the federal government.
And like Craig, I've never so much as hinted that the military has no areas where waste can be addressed and eliminated. That's Dan irrationally attacking conservatives again.
But tell me which would be easier starting point for reigning in spending to avoid raising the debt ceiling?
1. Going through each department and combing through all expenses to determine where the wasteful spending is and determining how best to address it, or
2. Going through lists such as that Rand Paul put together and eliminating all which is beyond the purview and obligation of the federal government?
I insist it's #2 if the point is this nonsensical fear-mongering about government shutdowns over the debt ceiling. There's NO need to increase borrowing or money printing to meet our actual federal fiduciary obligations. NONE. We have the dough, and whether it's point 1 OR 2, it can be done without increased spending.
In addition to those two points (and doing one doesn't necessarily mean we don't do both), there is also the ability to simply cut 1% off of the previous year's spending across the board, cutting staff in the federal government which is unnecessary in the first place, and a host of other such cuts.
Dan simply sees some "report" which tickles his marxist fancy and believes it to be the totality of the issue. For example, spending money to give felons ANOTHER education so that they SUPPOSEDLY do not return to a life of crime. Aside from the immorality of giving the worst of us another free education where the average law-abiding person PAYS for additional education for himself, Dan objects to the notion that these felons repay the cost with a garnishing of their wages after release. This moron demands a study to "prove" that it would do any good. He doesn't regard this free additional education as an increase of the felon's "debt to society" which he is obliged to repay. Thus, without such a requirement placed upon the felon (here, we'll help you get a real job, but you must pay us back for the education), without even considering this most reasonable and rational expectation, there's no way I could support spending MY money on criminals for any reason but to keep them off the streets indefinitely.
As to illegal immigrants, there is no ethical/moral expenditure which enables their selfish disregard for our laws, borders and sovereignty. Catch them and deport them as often as required. THAT is the proper use of our tax dollars for dealing with illegals. We have a path to citizenship which asshats like Dan fail to respect and fail worse to provide an explanation for what exactly is wrong with it. Get in line or go away.
Post a Comment